Theos-Talk Archives (February 2007 Message tt00091)

Dear Konstantin

You wrote, "Aren't HPB's thoughts about rotation of the planets clear 
fraud and should they be exposed?" 

To which Perry replied, "There is a difference being simply being 
wrong to actually manufacturing and concocting data in experiments to 
fit your theory."

This is an important distinction.

Bishop Leadbeater was clearly untruthful or fraudulent in numerous 
matters of determinable and demonstrable fact.
He claimed to be representing Madame Blavatsky's version of
Theosophy. On many, many subjects he did not. 
He claimed to be in direct contact with Madame Blavatsky's masters. 
Given the utterly contradictory accounts of
cosmogonies and cosmologies, any reasonable assessment would 
manifestly demonstrate that he was not.
He claimed to be born on a particular date. Clearly he
was not. 
He claimed to have attended prestigious British
universities, he did not. 
He claimed to have seen the Mahatma M in 1851; another consciously 
concocted lie or fraud. 
And the list goes on and on. Whether we term these indiscretions as 
untruths, lies or fraud they are indisputable matters of fact, which 
only the most ardent apologist would deny or avoid.

An open minded observer might feel the need to consider these exposed 
frauds when investigating the good Bishop's putative "psychic" 
visions concerning atoms, human life on Mars, meetings with the "Lord 
of the World" and many other such pronouncements.

Both Bishop Leadbeater and Dr Annie Besant have been proven far and 
beyond any reasonable doubt to have lied and to have manipulated and 
deceived their followers on many occasions and in many ways. 
This is simple fraud.

At this stage, the same cannot be said of Blavatsky with any similar 
degree of proof.

Kind regards
Nigel